Caswell v. Comstock’s Empirical Analysis
1859
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently July 1928
8 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Edwards v. State · Gudgell v. Mead · McMurtry v. Glascock · Chouteau v. Rice · Williams v. Field
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Such a decree is clearly interlocutory, and not final. No decree, we think, is final that directs a reference to a master or other officer to do what the court, but for its power to make such reference, would itself have to do before it could decide the case. Such references are made not in execution of the decree, but to relieve the court of what it would otherwise have to do itself. The acts and doings of the master in all such cases are in their nature judicial, and not ministerial, and to be effectual must be confirmed by the court,, when they become the acts of the court itself.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Webber v. Randall“. “ A decree with such a reference can with no more propriety be called a final decree than a judgment at law with a reference to a clerk or a jury to assess damages can be called a final judgment.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Webber v. Randall
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.